Station Casinos and Proposition 48

"What does a casino have to do with an incoming NCAA athlete's GPA and SAT scores?"

Not that Prop 48 - California's upcoming Proposition 48, which is starting to get some play on TV commercials and mailers in California.

Anyway, Proposition 48 would authorize a tribal casino just northwest of Fresno, along a reasonably large freeway. The problem is, it's not on the tribe's original reservation, but the federal government and Governor Brown determined that it was "in the best interest of the Indian tribe and its members, and would not be detrimental to the surrounding community" (Title 25, Section 2719(b)(1)(A), United States Code) to grant an exemption. The "yes" side, including Governor Brown, claim it would help the tribes involved; the "no" side, including Senator Feinstein, claim it opens the door to pretty much every city in California having a casino (and never mind that sports books and roulette, including card roulette and E-roulette, would be illegal in any new casino).

Station Casinos is involved as it would build and manage the new casino; presumably, this is why it donated almost $400,000 to the "yes" campaign.

Quote: ThatDonGuy

"What does a casino have to do with an incoming NCAA athlete's GPA and SAT scores?"

Not that Prop 48 - California's upcoming Proposition 48, which is starting to get some play on TV commercials and mailers in California.

Anyway, Proposition 48 would authorize a tribal casino just northwest of Fresno, along a reasonably large freeway. The problem is, it's not on the tribe's original reservation, but the federal government and Governor Brown determined that it was "in the best interest of the Indian tribe and its members, and would not be detrimental to the surrounding community" (Title 25, Section 2719(b)(1)(A), United States Code) to grant an exemption. The "yes" side, including Governor Brown, claim it would help the tribes involved; the "no" side, including Senator Feinstein, claim it opens the door to pretty much every city in California having a casino (and never mind that sports books and roulette, including card roulette and E-roulette, would be illegal in any new casino).

Station Casinos is involved as it would build and manage the new casino; presumably, this is why it donated almost $400,000 to the "yes" campaign.

Senator Feinstein is from California, right? How is it possible that she doesn't know that all of California's major cities already have casinos? Nobody walks into Club One (IN Fresno) and says "gosh, only 50 tables? it's a shame this city doesn't have a casino..."

Quote: rdw4potus

Senator Feinstein is from California, right? How is it possible that she doesn't know that all of California's major cities already have casinos? Nobody walks into Club One (IN Fresno) and says "gosh, only 50 tables? it's a shame this city doesn't have a casino..."

Not sure why card rooms are permissible, and other things aren't. But then places have dog racing and horse racing, and sometimes just certain kinds of slots.

Bingo always seems to get a pass in most places.

The No side is largely funded by a separate Indian tribe that has more geographically accessible casinos.

Feinstein? Remember her as Mayor of SF? Every darn construction project in town had her name on it... then when they instituted a sales tax increase some wag titled the tax charts distributed to merchants "Feinsteins New Tax".

Quote: rdw4potus

Senator Feinstein is from California, right? How is it possible that she doesn't know that all of California's major cities already have casinos? Nobody walks into Club One (IN Fresno) and says "gosh, only 50 tables? it's a shame this city doesn't have a casino..."

San Francisco has a casino? San Jose? Oakland? Sacramento? I am not talking about ones that are 40 miles away - I am talking about pretty much within the city limits.

Club One has no machines. It's a card room that just calls itself a casino. Nobody seems to have any problems with card rooms, for some reason. San Pablo Lytton Casino is only a short drive from Oakland and San Francisco, and it's just off I-80, but all of its machines are Class II. There's a reason people would rather drive the 50+ miles to Graton or Cache Creek.

Sorry for the "double post" here...

Quote: rxwine

Not sure why card rooms are permissible, and other things aren't. But then places have dog racing and horse racing, and sometimes just certain kinds of slots.

Bingo always seems to get a pass in most places.

In California, "casinos" were outlawed when the state's voters approved the lottery back in 1984 or so. Card rooms have been legal for a long time, but until recently, they had to be player-dealt games; no house-dealt blackjack, for example. (This was a problem in that you could only bet up to what the dealer was willing to put up as a bank.)

I remember playing bingo in California 40 years ago. As long as it is for a non-profit organization, it's fairly easy to be able to offer bingo in California.

Note that, while horse (and mule) racing exists in California, dog racing is expressly prohibited (somebody tried to get an authorization for it on the ballot once, but the combination of horse racing, animal protection, and casino interests was too much for it to pass), except for things like "wiener dog races" at county fairs.

Quote: ThatDonGuy

"What does a casino have to do with an incoming NCAA athlete's GPA and SAT scores?"

Not that Prop 48 - California's upcoming Proposition 48, which is starting to get some play on TV commercials and mailers in California.

Anyway, Proposition 48 would authorize a tribal casino just northwest of Fresno, along a reasonably large freeway. The problem is, it's not on the tribe's original reservation, but the federal government and Governor Brown determined that it was "in the best interest of the Indian tribe and its members, and would not be detrimental to the surrounding community" (Title 25, Section 2719(b)(1)(A), United States Code) to grant an exemption. The "yes" side, including Governor Brown, claim it would help the tribes involved; the "no" side, including Senator Feinstein, claim it opens the door to pretty much every city in California having a casino (and never mind that sports books and roulette, including card roulette and E-roulette, would be illegal in any new casino).

Station Casinos is involved as it would build and manage the new casino; presumably, this is why it donated almost $400,000 to the "yes" campaign.

I saw a commercial against this, which greatly irritated me since I don't live in Calfiornia and I hate commercials when I'm trying to illegally stream movies (like I hate ploppies). The Indian said they honored their part of the deal by never opening up a casino outside their land. So vote no. I thought, no you didn't honor anything, you were mandated. If you tried, you would have been shut down immediately and quite possibly arrested. In addition, you wanting people to vote no has nothing to do with honor...it only has to do with stifling competition and lining your own pockets with the white man's money. I hate you, Mr. Indian.
Because of the stupid, condescending, dishonest commercial, I hope everyone votes yes.

Its all political hogwash of one geographically well-positioned tribe trying to exclude poorer tribes who are less fortunate to have reservations near major highways. Casino management companies voice their "neutral" concerns of course!! Each side presents carefully tailored "independent surveys" from "neutral experts" and no one admits to it all being an advocacy campaign for one set of tribes against another.

The Los Angeles area has lots of so-called "player banked" casinos. The main problem with them is that to play games other than poker you have to pay a 1% fee, rounded up, to the house. You can pretty much forget about banking the games on a long term basis as the syndicates that make a business out of it won't like it.

The bay area has them too, although I think not as many as LA. I've never seen any others.

Are there any casinos left that just charge a commission on table games?